UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-2170

ALFREDO LEON SANCHEZ,

Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
E. NORRIS TOLSON; RONALD G. STARLING; DENNIS
O'DELL; PHILLIP REDMOND; J. W. TULBERT;
PEERLESS INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendants - Appellees,
versus
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Amicus Curiae.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees,
District Judge. (CA-03-123-V)

Submitted:

March 16, 2005

Decided:

April 26, 2005

Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Aaron E. Michel, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Roy

Cooper, Attorney General, Christopher G. Browning, Jr., North

Carolina Solicitor General, Michael D. Youth, Assistant Attorney

General, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North
Carolina; Allan R. Gitter, Douglas R. Vreeland, WOMBLE, CARLYLE,
SANDRIDGE & RICE, P.L.L.C., Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for
Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

- 2 -

PER CURIAM:
Alfredo Leon Sanchez appeals the district courts order
dismissing his civil action that he filed under 42 U.S.C. 1983
(2000) and North Carolina law.

We note Sanchez does not seek

appellate review of the portions of the district courts order

that: (a) found all defendants except Peerless Insurance Company
were

shielded

from

damages

in

their

individual

and

official

capacities by qualified immunity and the Eleventh Amendment; (b)

dismissed

the

insurance

company

because

its

liability

was

derivative of the liability of another dismissed defendant; and (c)

found the federal court could not grant the relief of the return of
property seized to pay state taxes.
On

appeal,

Sanchez

challenges

the

district

courts

dismissal of his request that the court declare the North Carolina
Unauthorized Substance Tax Act, N.C.G.S. 105-113.105 through
105-113.113, unconstitutional on its face and as applied to him.
Sanchez also argues on appeal that the district court should have
given him leave to amend his complaint to cure any deficiencies.
We conclude the district court properly found Sanchez failed to
establish

that

the

Unauthorized

Substance

unconstitutional as applied and on its face.

Tax

Act

was

We note this court

has declined to hold the current version of the North Carolina

Unauthorized Substance Tax Act to be an unconstitutional criminal
penalty.

See Nivens v. Gilchrist, 319 F.3d 151, 157 (4th Cir.),

- 3 -

cert. denied, 539 U.S. 915 (2003).

We also conclude the district

court did not abuse its discretion in declining to grant Sanchezs

informal and non-specific request for leave to amend.
Accordingly, we have reviewed the record and we find no
reversible error. We affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court.

See Sanchez v. Tolson, No. CA-03-123-V (W.D.N.C. Aug. 6,

2004).

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

- 4 -